By Mike King
I see that the never-ending discussion about how best to evaluate the business benefits that PR delivers has raised its tired head again - this time in the FT. But I for one am fed up with the PR industry’s constant state of self-doubt, and its struggle to find new ways to demonstrate its value and justify its existence. Surely, its time for the PR industry to grow up and show a bit more self-confidence in the service it delivers.
We all know that it’s not just about counting cuts, producing advertising value equivalents or even looking at how many direct sales leads a PR campaign has generated. PR is about much more than that - its key deliverable for any organisation is surely building reputation and establishing market/sector credibility.
It is well documented that business leaders view corporate reputation as one of their most valuable assets. Yet bizarrely, the PR industry - which plays an integral role in establishing and maintaining this reputation - seems to operate with an in-built inferiority complex, forever bowing to requests from jittery marketing departments to measure ROI based on arbitrary and often meaningless criteria.
Yes, of course a successful campaign needs to be generating positive coverage, and measurable targets are great for setting expectations and determining the scope and extent of any campaign. Yet surely the honest answer to the question ‘What ROI am I going to get from my PR spend?’ is increased credibility and an enhanced reputation. It really is as simple as that.
Other professions providing business services don’t suffer the same lack of self-worth. Take accountants for instance, a profession that, if called upon, could no doubt calculate the answer to the ROI question to at least three decimal places. But think about it - what ROI do you get from your own firm’s accountants? Most of us need to use professional accountants, but can you put a figure on the actual ‘value’ of this expertise?
I’m sure if I asked a firm of accountants what ROI they delivered, they’d perhaps talk about savings made over employing in-house staff to carry out the work, access to their expertise, the ability to handle peaks in activity. But it’s unlikely that they’d attempt to come up with some kind of ‘bottom line impactfulness index’ or have a crisis of confidence whenever the word ‘accountability’ is mentioned - unlike PR.
I just wish that the PR industry would stop acting like a moody teenager, one minute loudly proclaiming how brilliant it is, then the next bleating 'nobody understands me'. Let's just get a grip, get on with the job we've been contracted to do, and do that job well - then maybe the business world might start taking us a bit more seriously.
Comments